My name will be great among the nations, from the rising to the setting of the sun. In every place incense and pure offerings will be brought to my name, because my name will be great among the nations," says the LORD Almighty.

Malachi 1:11

Do orthodox ever use incense drawn from local areas to represent the global nature of the kingdom? Does God only want to smell southwest Asian incense?

Yes we do. It's out of the rabid Russian ultranationalist brigade, who have also written a troparion (reproduced in the ornately-bordered panel below Stalin's image) and kontakion for him. Both "hymns" are in Slavonic (or, what passes for it), I can post a rough translation if folks are interested.

The irony is that the same idiots are also gunning for "Saint" Rasputin (they call him "St Gregory the New"), and wax lyrical about the glories of imperial Russia, especially of "Saint" Ivan IV. Ummm, last time I checked, Bolshevism booted out the Tsars and assassinated a good number of the imperial family .... And. of course, there's the small matter of all those thousands and thousands of people whom the Russian church has rightly glorified as New Martyrs and Confessors. Remind me again of why they were made to suffer, and by whom?

The inscription goes further than most in its blasphemy, in that it styles Stalin as "Holy Martyr". This is reinforced by the small panel on the right, which shows Stalin being smothered in bed. Seems these folks believe in a conspiracy that Stalin was murdered, and not that he was felled by a stroke. There is also a depiction of the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior on the lower right, the very church that Stalin personally ordered be destroyed in 1931, commissioning a film crew to officially document the destruction, as a proclamation of the triumph of Soviet atheism. Ridiculous.

Yes we do. It's out of the rabid Russian ultranationalist brigade, who have also written a troparion (reproduced in the ornately-bordered panel below Stalin's image) and kontakion for him. Both "hymns" are in Slavonic (or, what passes for it), I can post a rough translation if folks are interested.

The irony is that the same idiots are also gunning for "Saint" Rasputin (they call him "St Gregory the New"), and wax lyrical about the glories of imperial Russia, especially of "Saint" Ivan IV. Ummm, last time I checked, Bolshevism booted out the Tsars and assassinated a good number of the imperial family .... And. of course, there's the small matter of all those thousands and thousands of people whom the Russian church has rightly glorified as New Martyrs and Confessors. Remind me again of why they were made to suffer, and by whom?

The inscription goes further than most in its blasphemy, in that it styles Stalin as "Holy Martyr". This is reinforced by the small panel on the right, which shows Stalin being smothered in bed. Seems these folks believe in a conspiracy that Stalin was murdered, and not that he was felled by a stroke. There is also a depiction of the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior on the lower right, the very church that Stalin personally ordered be destroyed in 1931, commissioning a film crew to officially document the destruction, as a proclamation of the triumph of Soviet atheism. Ridiculous.

And it's not a proper icon, not that I really needed to say that ...

Well, I thought he died "under mysterious circumstances."

Also heard he died listening to the well-known believer Maria Yudina play Mozart on a record. He liked her playing so much, he sent her a lot of money. Maria sent him back a letter saying roughly, "Thank you for the money. I gave it to my church. As for you, I pray every day that God forgive you for your sins before him and the Russian people." Henchmen waited for him to twitch an eyebrow as a signal to arrest her, but he just laid the letter down and nothing happened to her. She outlived him. She would openly tell guests, while cleaning the table of crumbs after dinner, "I have two enemies--crumbs and the Soviet power." Her sister used to hold a large icon of Panagia in the audience at her concerts. Because of her public faith, she was not allowed to leave the USSR for concerts in foreign countries. She was a great lady and a brilliant pianist, IMO.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

They're nowhere near as similar (in fact only extremely superficially do they have any similarity at all) as you seem to believe. To take your two examples, Hercules is a demi-god (so half and half) born of Zeus having a physical relationship with his mother Alcmene. This is nothing like the Incarnation. Similarly, despite the claims to the contrary that are often heard Mithra wasn't born of a virgin, or even born at all really, but was pulled fully formed from a rock. And as for any alleged similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, even if they were to exist you couldn't argue that the pre-date Christianity. Almost everything we know about the Mithraic cult in the Empire is contemporary with the early Church (about 1st -4th century) and bears little resemblance to the pre-Christian Iranian belief in Mithra from which it supposedly derives.

James

Thanks for that information : ) I have not really cross referenced Christianity and pagan beliefs thoroughly but will.

I have a question why didn't God during the Old Testament reveal himself completely to the Jews ? But I do believe the Prophets knew who God was "Triune" in nature yet did not mention his Complete Essence I,e. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Why is that the case he was not completely revealed like he was in the New Testament ?.

They're nowhere near as similar (in fact only extremely superficially do they have any similarity at all) as you seem to believe. To take your two examples, Hercules is a demi-god (so half and half) born of Zeus having a physical relationship with his mother Alcmene. This is nothing like the Incarnation. Similarly, despite the claims to the contrary that are often heard Mithra wasn't born of a virgin, or even born at all really, but was pulled fully formed from a rock. And as for any alleged similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, even if they were to exist you couldn't argue that the pre-date Christianity. Almost everything we know about the Mithraic cult in the Empire is contemporary with the early Church (about 1st -4th century) and bears little resemblance to the pre-Christian Iranian belief in Mithra from which it supposedly derives.

James

Thanks for that information : ) I have not really cross referenced Christianity and pagan beliefs thoroughly but will.

I have a question why didn't God during the Old Testament reveal himself completely to the Jews ? But I do believe the Prophets knew who God was "Triune" in nature yet did not mention his Complete Essence I,e. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Why is that the case he was not completely revealed like he was in the New Testament ?.

The Trinity is in the OT, actually. The Spirit of God hovered over the water, Christ in Jesaja 6 etc. etc.

« Last Edit: October 10, 2012, 08:46:34 AM by Cyrillic »

Logged

That is the land of lost content, I see it shining plain, The happy highways where I went And cannot come again.-A.E. Housman

Yes we do. It's out of the rabid Russian ultranationalist brigade, who have also written a troparion (reproduced in the ornately-bordered panel below Stalin's image) and kontakion for him. Both "hymns" are in Slavonic (or, what passes for it), I can post a rough translation if folks are interested.

The irony is that the same idiots are also gunning for "Saint" Rasputin (they call him "St Gregory the New"), and wax lyrical about the glories of imperial Russia, especially of "Saint" Ivan IV. Ummm, last time I checked, Bolshevism booted out the Tsars and assassinated a good number of the imperial family .... And. of course, there's the small matter of all those thousands and thousands of people whom the Russian church has rightly glorified as New Martyrs and Confessors. Remind me again of why they were made to suffer, and by whom?

The inscription goes further than most in its blasphemy, in that it styles Stalin as "Holy Martyr". This is reinforced by the small panel on the right, which shows Stalin being smothered in bed. Seems these folks believe in a conspiracy that Stalin was murdered, and not that he was felled by a stroke. There is also a depiction of the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior on the lower right, the very church that Stalin personally ordered be destroyed in 1931, commissioning a film crew to officially document the destruction, as a proclamation of the triumph of Soviet atheism. Ridiculous.

Having once over-lengthily traversed in separated Rome and among its adherents, I remember such questions being asked of the papists as well. This may be why you are asking, as you stand at the crossroads of 1054 inquiring about where the road leads between Schism and Pentecost, and who swerved . I have seen archaelogical /artifactual images that seem to conclude that the Roman mitres are exact replicas of the Babylonian fish-god, Dagon's haberdashery. Wouldn't surprise me, really. That said, I agree with others who say or imply with St, Paul that we should "...avoid foolish questions...[ ]...and contentions..." (Titus) and again in 2 Timothy 2:23. I understand such contentions seem to have some bearing on our inquiring (I am a catechumen), but the exhortations to "Come and see" (Gospels)and to "taste and see" (Psalms) invite us to the reality Itself which doesn't need historians and archaeologists to commend or qualify it, though their work, when done in the service of Truth, is a gift.

God Bless you on your journey!

Ivanov

Logged

"It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me." - "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to babes." - Holy Gospel

"Syncretic"? You mean like quoting Mahatma Gandhi's anti-religious babble in your signature, while posting nothing but your own version of it in your endless anti-Christ topics, and all the while calling yourself Orthodox?

"Syncretic"? You mean like quoting Mahatma Gandhi's anti-religious babble in your signature, while posting nothing but your own version of it in your endless anti-Christ topics, and all the while calling yourself Orthodox?

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.

Quote

For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, [wicked demons] put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter, under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere marvelous tales, like the things which were said by the poets.

The devils... said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and gave out that he was the discoverer of the vine, and they number wine among his mysteries; and they taught that, having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven. (Referring to Jesus turning water to wine as Dionysus, or Bacchus, did 600 years earlier.)

[The devils] gave out that Bellerophon, a man born of man, himself ascended to heaven on his horse Pegasus. (Reference to Jesus riding into town on an ass.)

And when [the devils] heard it said by the other prophet Isaiah, that He should be born of a virgin, and by His own means ascend into heaven, they pretended that Perseus was spoken of. (Reference to Perseus being born of a virgin before Jesus.)

And when, again, [the devils] learned that it had been foretold that He should heal every sickness, and raise the dead, they produced Aesculapius. (Reference to virtually all of the miracles of Jesus being copies of Aesculapius.)

Quote

And the devils, indeed, having heard this washing [baptism] published by the prophet, instigated those who enter their temples, and are about to approach them with libations and burnt-offerings, also to sprinkle themselves.

Quote

And this food is called among us Eucharistia, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body"; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood"; and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

Quote

...And this very solemnity, too, the evil spirits have introduced into the "Mysteries of Mithra"; for you do or may know that when anyone is initiated into this religion, bread and a cup of water, with a certain form of words, are made use of in the sacrifice. (Taylor, lxiii)

Quote

ALLEGED QUOTE: Having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, the wicked spirits put forward many to be called Sons of God under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things that were said with regard to Christ were merely marvellous tales, like the things that were said by the poets. Justin Martyr First Apology, Chapter 54 (LIV)/quote]

Keep in mind that these pagan religions all came first. Justin Martyr is not claiming that they copied Christianity after Jesus came, but that "wicked devils" knew ahead of time of Jesus' coming, and thus set up pre-copies of Christianity.

Tertullian

Quote

Tertullian [Tertullian, /Praescr./, ch. 40.] states that the worshippers of Mithra practiced baptism by water, through which they were thought to be redeemed from sin, and that the priest made a sign upon the forehead of the person baptized; but as this was also a Christian rite, Tertullian declares that the Devil must have effected the coincidence for his wicked ends. "The Devil'', he also writes, "imitates even the main parts of our divine mysteries", and "has gone about to apply to the worship of idols those very things of which the administration of Christ's sacraments consists"./quote]

Quote

"The devil, whose business is to pervert the truth, mimics the exact circumstances of the Divine Sacraments. He baptises his believers and promises forgiveness of sins from the Sacred Fount, and thereby initiates them into the religion of Mithras. Thus he celebrates the oblation of bread and brings in the symbol of the resurrection [the cross]. Let us, therefore, acknowledge the craftiness of the devil who copies certain things of those that be Divine."

Quote

The Prescription Against Heretics:

The question will arise, By whom is to be interpreted the sense of the passages which make for heresies? By the devil, of course, to whom pertain those wiles which pervert the truth, and who, by the mystic rites of his idols, vies even with the essential portions of the sacraments of God. He, too, baptizes somethat is, his own believers and faithful followers; he promises the putting away of sins by a layer (of his own); and if my memory still serves me, Mithra there, (in the kingdom of Satan) sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, and before a sword wreathes a crown. What also must we say to (Satan's) limiting his chief priest to a single marriage? He, too, has his virgins; he, too, has his proficients in continence. Suppose now we revolve in our minds the superstitions of Numa Pompilius, and consider his priestly offices and badges and privileges, his sacrificial services, too, and the instruments and vessels of the sacrifices themselves, and the curious rites of his expiations and vows: is it not clear to us that the devil imitated the well-known moroseness of the Jewish law? Since, therefore he has sown such emulation in his great aim of expressing, in the concerns of his idolatry, those very things of which consists the administration of Christ's sacraments, it follows, of course, that the same being, possessing still the same genius, both set his heart upon, and succeeded in, adapting to his profane and rival creed the very documents of divine things and of the Christian saints... (Roberts (1870), 15.48) Chapter 40 (XL)

Quote

"They cheat themselves with waters which are widowed. For washing is the channel through which they are initiated into some sacred rites of some notorious Isis or Mithras... We recognise here also the zeal of the devil rivalling the things of God, while we find him, too, practising baptism in his subjects. What similarity is there? The unclean cleanses! The ruiner sets free! The damned absolves! He will, forsooth, destroy his own work, by washing away the sins which himself inspires! These (remarks) have been set down by way of testimony against such as reject the faith. If they put no trust in the things of God, the spurious imitations of which, in the case of God's rival, they do trust in. Are there not other cases too, in which, without any sacrament, unclean spirits brood on waters, in spurious imitation of that brooding of the Divine Spirit in the very beginning?" On Baptism Chapter 5/quote]

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

Your reply to my question is as close to a non-response as is humanly possible while still technically typing words (or in this case, cutting and pasting words; apparently coming up with your own reply requires a bit too much brain power from you). You shame the Fathers by abusing their words in service of your absolute stupidity, and the word "Orthodox" belongs as far from you as Mithra does from Christ (i.e., they have absolutely nothing to do with each other). It is a credit to this entire site that you have not been banned yet, and really to God's mercy that He should allow you to continually blaspheme Him and still be alive, despite all indications that you are really taking your existence and other peoples' patience for granted.

Besides, mithraism came later than christianity, so if anything mithraism copied christianity.

Mithraism precedes Christianity.The adoption of the Mithraic religion in the Roman Empire is as early as 1st century or even earlier.

Quote

Mithraism arrived fully mature at Rome with the return of the legions from the east in the first century BC. As an action god of armies and the champion of heroes, he appealed to the professional Roman soldiers, who carried his cult to Iberia, Britain, the German frontiers and Dacia.

The cult of Mithras began to attract attention at Rome about the end of the first century AD, perhaps in connection with the conquest of then-Zoroastrian Armenia. The earliest material evidence for the Roman worship of Mithras dates from that period, in a record of Roman soldiers who came from the military garrison at Carnuntum in the Roman province of Upper Pannonia (near the Danube River in modern Austria, near the Hungarian border). These soldiers fought against the Parthians and were involved in the suppression of the revolts in Jerusalem from 60 A.D. to about 70 A.D. When they returned home, they made Mithraic dedications, probably in the year 71 or 72.

Statius mentions the typical Mithraic relief in his Thebaid (Book i. 719,720), around A. D. 80; Plutarch's Life of Pompey also makes it clear that the worship of Mithras was well known at that time.

Besides, mithraism came later than christianity, so if anything mithraism copied christianity.

Mithraism in the Roman Empire is at least as old as christianity maybe older.Mithraism as a religious precedes Christianity with 1400 years.

But Mithraism in the context of the Roman Empire bears little resemblance to the Persian worship of Mithras that pre-dates it. So little, in fact, that you really can't call it the same religion. Roman Mithraism was a syncretic cult that absorbed the figure of Mithras. This is quite similar to the way some gnostic cults absorbed the figure of Christ. In neither case is the syncretic cult that uses the figure a direct descendent of the faith in which the figure was originally found.

James

Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos

Besides, mithraism came later than christianity, so if anything mithraism copied christianity.

Mithraism in the Roman Empire is at least as old as christianity maybe older.Mithraism as a religious precedes Christianity with 1400 years.

But Mithraism in the context of the Roman Empire bears little resemblance to the Persian worship of Mithras that pre-dates it. So little, in fact, that you really can't call it the same religion. Roman Mithraism was a syncretic cult that absorbed the figure of Mithras. This is quite similar to the way some gnostic cults absorbed the figure of Christ. In neither case is the syncretic cult that uses the figure a direct descendent of the faith in which the figure was originally found.

James

Keep telling yourself that.. the secret rites of Mythra were being performed in 67 BC in Cilicia.Sculptures of the roman version of Mithras slaying a bull were being produced by Greek sculptors in Pergamum in the 2nd century BC.Both this dates precede not only christianity but even the birth of Christ.

"It is tempting to identify the Roman Mithras with the Persian Mithra, except that there is no known Persian legend or text about Mithra killing a bull or being associated with other animals. On the other hand, there is a story of Ahriman, the evil god in popular developments of Zoroastrianism, killing a bull. It is also hard to explain how the Sun-god Mithra would come to be worshipped in the windowless, cave-like mithraeum.

A possible link between Persia and Rome, which could be the stage for these changes, may be the kingdoms of Parthia and Pontus in Asia Minor. Several of their kings were called Mithradates, meaning "given by Mithra", starting with Mithradates I of Parthia (died 138 BC). It would seem that, in those kingdoms, Mithra was a god whose power lent luster even to a king. And it was at Pergamum, in the 2nd century BC, that Greek sculptors started to produce bas-relief imagery of Mithra Taurocthonos, "Mithra the bull-slayer." Although the cult of Mithras never caught on in the Greek homeland, those sculptures may indicate the route between Persian Mithra and Roman Mithras.

Around the first century AD, the Greek historian Plutarch wrote about pirates of Cilicia who practiced the Mithraic "secret rites" around 67 BC. Since Cilicia was the coastal province in the southeast of Anatolia, the Mithras mentioned by Plutarch may have been worship of the Persian god Mithra; or may have been associated with Ahriman, the Persian god who killed a bull."

Mithraism arrived at Rome fully matured in the 1st century bc, before Christ.

"Mithraism arrived fully mature at Rome with the return of the legions from the east in the first century BC. As an action god of armies and the champion of heroes, he appealed to the professional Roman soldiers, who carried his cult to Iberia, Britain, the German frontiers and Dacia.

The cult of Mithras began to attract attention at Rome about the end of the first century AD, perhaps in connection with the conquest of then-Zoroastrian Armenia. The earliest material evidence for the Roman worship of Mithras dates from that period, in a record of Roman soldiers who came from the military garrison at Carnuntum in the Roman province of Upper Pannonia (near the Danube River in modern Austria, near the Hungarian border). These soldiers fought against the Parthians and were involved in the suppression of the revolts in Jerusalem from 60 A.D. to about 70 A.D. When they returned home, they made Mithraic dedications, probably in the year 71 or 72.

Statius mentions the typical Mithraic relief in his Thebaid (Book i. 719,720), around A. D. 80; Plutarch's Life of Pompey also makes it clear that the worship of Mithras was well known at that time."

The question of the origin of Mithraism has intrigued scholars for many years. Franz Cumont, one of the greatest students of Mithraism, theorized that the roots of the Roman6mystery religion were in ancient Iran. He identified the ancient Aryan deity who appears in Persian literature as Mithra with the Hindu god Mitra of the Vedic hymns. Mithra/Mitra was a solar deity. With the coming of Zoroastrianism to Persia in the

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

No .. that is THE STORY OF CHRISTIANITY.. paralelism with pagan and jewish mythologies merged together into a syncretic religion/philosophy..

I think you have a point, in the sense that Christianity occupies the middle ground between Jewish "mono"theism and Ancient Near Eastern "poly"theism. From The Religious Spirit of the Slavs, 1916, by the Rev. Father Nicolai Velimirovic:

Quote

What is the number of these powers surrounding us? "Many," answered Paganism. "One only," answered Judaism and Islam. "One in Trinity," answered Christianity.

So—Christianity is a viá media between limitless Polytheism and absolute Monotheism. Professor Haeckel of Jena, in his hatred of Christianity, instanced Mohammedanism as a better religion and scornfully called the Christian religion "Polytheism." The definition is not altogether untrue. Paganism was not wholly false. The Christian dogma of the Trinity in relation to this world symbolically means unity in multitude. This dogma expresses a principle, an idea, rather than a number. As we cannot define God's being chemically, historically, psychologically, etc., how can we hope to define Him mathematically? God is beyond numbers; He is beyond scientific research; beyond all expression. One in three, that is half-way to Polytheism and to Monotheism. One in three gives the substance of God's life and binds Him to His own work, the created world.

« Last Edit: October 16, 2012, 11:06:37 AM by Jetavan »

Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

Besides, mithraism came later than christianity, so if anything mithraism copied christianity.

That is true by the way. One of the problems with Protestantism is in order to connect symbolically their own persecutions under Reformation these folks exaggerated the degree of persecution during the time of the Martyrs. Its not to diminish their sacrifice, but the actual history of Christian persecution during the Roman era is scattered and isolated to specific times, situations, and regions. During those first 300 years we had open and public churches, were sometimes quite visible in our communities, and were only forced underground during very specific and limited times. These times were indeed as horrific as the Synaxarium suggests, and I would never diminish their sacrifice or the suffering we endured, but we shouldn't infer from the Martyrs that every single day of Christianity before Constantine was a life and death struggle to survive. We had affluent communities, we had public places of worship, we were visible. How else could we have survived as an institutional Church for three centuries?

That being said, yes, it is a fact that Mithraism may have indeed borrowed from Christianity, because this cult was most popular in the mid-third century. True, it was just after the Diocletian persecutions, we the Church bounced back from that, just like Saint Athanasius came back from his several exiles by God's enduring Grace.

stay blessed,habte selassie

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

Besides, mithraism came later than christianity, so if anything mithraism copied christianity.

Mithraism in the Roman Empire is at least as old as christianity maybe older.Mithraism as a religious precedes Christianity with 1400 years.

But Mithraism in the context of the Roman Empire bears little resemblance to the Persian worship of Mithras that pre-dates it. So little, in fact, that you really can't call it the same religion. Roman Mithraism was a syncretic cult that absorbed the figure of Mithras. This is quite similar to the way some gnostic cults absorbed the figure of Christ. In neither case is the syncretic cult that uses the figure a direct descendent of the faith in which the figure was originally found.

James

Keep telling yourself that.. the secret rites of Mythra were being performed in 67 BC in Cilicia.Sculptures of the roman version of Mithras slaying a bull were being produced by Greek sculptors in Pergamum in the 2nd century BC.Both this dates precede not only christianity but even the birth of Christ.

"It is tempting to identify the Roman Mithras with the Persian Mithra, except that there is no known Persian legend or text about Mithra killing a bull or being associated with other animals. On the other hand, there is a story of Ahriman, the evil god in popular developments of Zoroastrianism, killing a bull. It is also hard to explain how the Sun-god Mithra would come to be worshipped in the windowless, cave-like mithraeum.

A possible link between Persia and Rome, which could be the stage for these changes, may be the kingdoms of Parthia and Pontus in Asia Minor. Several of their kings were called Mithradates, meaning "given by Mithra", starting with Mithradates I of Parthia (died 138 BC). It would seem that, in those kingdoms, Mithra was a god whose power lent luster even to a king. And it was at Pergamum, in the 2nd century BC, that Greek sculptors started to produce bas-relief imagery of Mithra Taurocthonos, "Mithra the bull-slayer." Although the cult of Mithras never caught on in the Greek homeland, those sculptures may indicate the route between Persian Mithra and Roman Mithras.

Around the first century AD, the Greek historian Plutarch wrote about pirates of Cilicia who practiced the Mithraic "secret rites" around 67 BC. Since Cilicia was the coastal province in the southeast of Anatolia, the Mithras mentioned by Plutarch may have been worship of the Persian god Mithra; or may have been associated with Ahriman, the Persian god who killed a bull."

Mithraism arrived at Rome fully matured in the 1st century bc, before Christ.

"Mithraism arrived fully mature at Rome with the return of the legions from the east in the first century BC. As an action god of armies and the champion of heroes, he appealed to the professional Roman soldiers, who carried his cult to Iberia, Britain, the German frontiers and Dacia.

The cult of Mithras began to attract attention at Rome about the end of the first century AD, perhaps in connection with the conquest of then-Zoroastrian Armenia. The earliest material evidence for the Roman worship of Mithras dates from that period, in a record of Roman soldiers who came from the military garrison at Carnuntum in the Roman province of Upper Pannonia (near the Danube River in modern Austria, near the Hungarian border). These soldiers fought against the Parthians and were involved in the suppression of the revolts in Jerusalem from 60 A.D. to about 70 A.D. When they returned home, they made Mithraic dedications, probably in the year 71 or 72.

Statius mentions the typical Mithraic relief in his Thebaid (Book i. 719,720), around A. D. 80; Plutarch's Life of Pompey also makes it clear that the worship of Mithras was well known at that time."

The question of the origin of Mithraism has intrigued scholars for many years. Franz Cumont, one of the greatest students of Mithraism, theorized that the roots of the Roman6mystery religion were in ancient Iran. He identified the ancient Aryan deity who appears in Persian literature as Mithra with the Hindu god Mitra of the Vedic hymns. Mithra/Mitra was a solar deity. With the coming of Zoroastrianism to Persia in the

Exactly how do you expect your somewhat dubious internet 'source' to convince anyone when it is filled with assumptions, inconsistencies and speculation and what little detail there is corresponds exactly to what I said in the first place? Nobody denies that worshippers of Mithras existed prior to Christ but almost everything we know about Mithraism dates from 1st to the 4th centuries AD. Just because someone refers to Mithras prior to Christ, particularly in the east, does not mean that they are referring to the same faith as we see in the post-Christian centuries and even if they are there is no way to discern whether any similarities (superficial as they undoubtedly are) are down to Christianity borrowing from Mithraism, Mithraism borrowing from Christianity, or (more likely given the fact that the two really aren't anywhere near as similar as the tales you seem to have swallowed would imply) they are simple coincidences.

James

Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos

Besides, mithraism came later than christianity, so if anything mithraism copied christianity.

That is true by the way. One of the problems with Protestantism is in order to connect symbolically their own persecutions under Reformation these folks exaggerated the degree of persecution during the time of the Martyrs. Its not to diminish their sacrifice, but the actual history of Christian persecution during the Roman era is scattered and isolated to specific times, situations, and regions. During those first 300 years we had open and public churches, were sometimes quite visible in our communities, and were only forced underground during very specific and limited times. These times were indeed as horrific as the Synaxarium suggests, and I would never diminish their sacrifice or the suffering we endured, but we shouldn't infer from the Martyrs that every single day of Christianity before Constantine was a life and death struggle to survive. We had affluent communities, we had public places of worship, we were visible. How else could we have survived as an institutional Church for three centuries?

That being said, yes, it is a fact that Mithraism may have indeed borrowed from Christianity, because this cult was most popular in the mid-third century. True, it was just after the Diocletian persecutions, we the Church bounced back from that, just like Saint Athanasius came back from his several exiles by God's enduring Grace.

They're nowhere near as similar (in fact only extremely superficially do they have any similarity at all) as you seem to believe. To take your two examples, Hercules is a demi-god (so half and half) born of Zeus having a physical relationship with his mother Alcmene. This is nothing like the Incarnation. Similarly, despite the claims to the contrary that are often heard Mithra wasn't born of a virgin, or even born at all really, but was pulled fully formed from a rock. And as for any alleged similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, even if they were to exist you couldn't argue that the pre-date Christianity. Almost everything we know about the Mithraic cult in the Empire is contemporary with the early Church (about 1st -4th century) and bears little resemblance to the pre-Christian Iranian belief in Mithra from which it supposedly derives.

James

Thanks for that information : ) I have not really cross referenced Christianity and pagan beliefs thoroughly but will.

I have a question why didn't God during the Old Testament reveal himself completely to the Jews ? But I do believe the Prophets knew who God was "Triune" in nature yet did not mention his Complete Essence I,e. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Why is that the case he was not completely revealed like he was in the New Testament ?.

Exactly. The revelation of the Trinity came at Epiphany/Theophany with the Baptism of Christ.

That said, all creation and even the sayings of the holy prophets confirm this, by divine providence. The Jews had more information than the Gentiles, but the Gentiles had some knowledge of God from Adam and his descendants and from nature and their consciences, not to mention the angels protecting the nations.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

"Mithraism" was a mysterious religion.. A secret religion.. that is why people don`t know too much about it.You have Justin the Martyr writing about the Mithraic mysteries, about their eucharist, baptism , etc.. You have other ancient historians writing about this religion and its general practice in the Roman Empire from the 1st century.

There is a world of difference between being a Mystery cult and being a secret, in this regard Mithraism was rather an open secret religion

I'm with Joseph Campbell on this one, and he was a devout and active Catholic.

I think we observe religious, cultural, and theological similarities between "pagans", Christians, Jews, and yes, even Muslims too, not because of literal borrowing from each other (though sometimes this is the case), but because these cultural manifestations stem from the same primal human subconscious archetypes like Carl Jung talks about. Our subconscious mind shares the same collective imagery and symbolism, so we tend to apply the same intuitive understandings to the same things. Its like what the Apostle Paul said about those who seem to follow the Law even in pagan practices.

Quote

for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them

Romans 2

We share the same collective mind and human experience, so naturally we come to the same kinds of worship, the same use of religious symbolism, and the same kinds of cultural practices and taboos, stemming from a common source.

stay blessed,habte selassie

« Last Edit: October 16, 2012, 05:02:11 PM by HabteSelassie »

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

"Mithraism" was a mysterious religion.. A secret religion.. that is why people don`t know too much about it.You have Justin the Martyr writing about the Mithraic mysteries, about their eucharist, baptism , etc.. You have other ancient historians writing about this religion and its general practice in the Roman Empire from the 1st century.

There is a world of difference between being a Mystery cult and being a secret, in this regard Mithraism was rather an open secret religion

I'm with Joseph Campbell on this one, and he was a devout and active Catholic.

I think we observe religious, cultural, and theological similarities between "pagans", Christians, Jews, and yes, even Muslims too, not because of literal borrowing from each other (though sometimes this is the case), but because these cultural manifestations stem from the same primal human subconscious archetypes like Carl Jung talks about. Our subconscious mind shares the same collective imagery and symbolism, so we tend to apply the same intuitive understandings to the same things. Its like what the Apostle Paul said about those who seem to follow the Law even in pagan practices.

Quote

for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them

Romans 2

We share the same collective mind and human experience, so naturally we come to the same kinds of worship, the same use of religious symbolism, and the same kinds of cultural practices and taboos, stemming from a common source.

stay blessed,habte selassie

what are you "saying" ?

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

I am saying that if there are ten literary or religious figures who are very similar to Jesus Christ, this is not necessarily to say that Christians borrowed from Mithris or Osiris or the Buddha, rather that all of these figures share the same Jungian universal archetypes and collective subconscious origin. We are not copying from each other necessarily as much as building from the same subconscious mind, the same mutual human experience. Even if we just go into these religious texts as a literary analysis we could come to these same conclusions, let alone theologically.

stay blessed,habte selassie

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.

I am saying that if there are ten literary or religious figures who are very similar to Jesus Christ, this is not necessarily to say that Christians borrowed from Mithris or Osiris or the Buddha, rather that all of these figures share the same Jungian universal archetypes and collective subconscious origin. We are not copying from each other necessarily as much as building from the same subconscious mind, the same mutual human experience. Even if we just go into these religious texts as a literary analysis we could come to these same conclusions, let alone theologically.

stay blessed,habte selassie

that is a weak argument.. and by that you are actually saying that Christ himself is a product of the finite(?) mind.

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

I am saying that if there are ten literary or religious figures who are very similar to Jesus Christ, this is not necessarily to say that Christians borrowed from Mithris or Osiris or the Buddha, rather that all of these figures share the same Jungian universal archetypes and collective subconscious origin. We are not copying from each other necessarily as much as building from the same subconscious mind, the same mutual human experience. Even if we just go into these religious texts as a literary analysis we could come to these same conclusions, let alone theologically.

stay blessed,habte selassie

that is a weak argument.. and by that you are actually saying that Christ himself is a product of the finite(?) mind.

Its an argument all the same.. and no, I am not saying Christ is a product of the finite mind, I am saying that those other messianic figures are a construct and projection of humanity's internal psychological need for a Savior. Why? Jesus Christ is that Savior, those others are psychological reflections of internal archetypes. There are only two ways to cut this cake, either Jesus Christ is not real in the very specific ways which the Church has consistently taught across two-thousand years (!!) or He is just another messianic figure like the ten other folks your link discussed. As I've argued on the myth-Jesus thread, there is no strictly historical Jesus. He is either as the Church teaches, or He is nothing, period. So if you're trying to convince me to suggest that the Church has across these two-thousand years been readily adapting Jesus Christ as a person and symbol to other cultural messiahs,you're reading too much Alexander Hislop or what is worse, that Jesus Christ isn't real at all but rather just another mythological literary figure, well..

stay blessed,habte selassie

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

I am saying that if there are ten literary or religious figures who are very similar to Jesus Christ, this is not necessarily to say that Christians borrowed from Mithris or Osiris or the Buddha, rather that all of these figures share the same Jungian universal archetypes and collective subconscious origin. We are not copying from each other necessarily as much as building from the same subconscious mind, the same mutual human experience. Even if we just go into these religious texts as a literary analysis we could come to these same conclusions, let alone theologically.

stay blessed,habte selassie

that is a weak argument.. and by that you are actually saying that Christ himself is a product of the finite(?) mind.

Its an argument all the same.. and no, I am not saying Christ is a product of the finite mind, I am saying that those other messianic figures are a construct and projection of humanity's internal psychological need for a Savior. Why? Jesus Christ is that Savior, those others are psychological reflections of internal archetypes. There are only two ways to cut this cake, either Jesus Christ is not real in the very specific ways which the Church has consistently taught across two-thousand years (!!) or He is just another messianic figure like the ten other folks your link discussed. As I've argued on the myth-Jesus thread, there is no strictly historical Jesus. He is either as the Church teaches, or He is nothing, period. So if you're trying to convince me to suggest that the Church has across these two-thousand years been readily adapting Jesus Christ as a person and symbol to other cultural messiahs,you're reading too much Alexander Hislop or what is worse, that Jesus Christ isn't real at all but rather just another mythological literary figure, well..

stay blessed,habte selassie

there are some details that are almoust adliteram coppied in Christian mythology.Like Dyonisius(Bachus) changing wine into water at a wedding.Like Buddha going at the age of 12 to the Temple and astonishing everyone with his wisdom.Dyonisius riding in a triumphal procession on an ass, a sacred king killed and eaten in a eucharistical ritual.Heracles descending into Hades to rescue people.

My idea is that many things from the life of Jesus might be a copycat, and likeso many things from the bible might be just false or that there really is a reason why the infinite God chose to have Jesus a copy of the pagan gods.Or that Jesus is just the product of the finite mind as you said.. The human mind being limited and subscribing to certain archetypes.

For me, things are not either Jesus is who the EOC says it is or he didn`t exist at all.. The EO itself borrowed from the Oriental theology and still does at the limit of contradicting past ecumenical councils.. The eschatology with sin, salvation, heaven , hell , etc.. The Church itself as you might have realized does not focus that much on Christ and faith in Christ , but at itself as an entity, on saints, etc.. The Church itself borrowed a lot of things from paganism , like the veneration of saints, prayer to the saints,almsgiving for the death, belief in a "purgatorial hell" , similar mysteries with the pagan mysteries, the same cloth, etc.. I think the EOC might have believed among time that Christ itself was not real (even if that was not the opinion of all) that is why it concentrated among itself and tried to make its theology more suitable to the universal theology than to the narrowmindness of the bible and later the councils.The fathers themselves were confused on matters of doctrine, and many of them believed things that later were labeled as heresy.. The EOC itself might have the wrong perception on Christ and who Christ is and might not be what Christ ment or had in mind(if he existed).. So the ecuation is not "the Christ of the Church or no Christ" but rather more complex, perhaps more different.. The Church has no personal relationship with Christ, except "through the so called mysteries" ..

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

Been reading some of the replies, If Paganism stole from Judaism and Christianity, where did the idea of the Son of God come from What makes Christianity's Son of God (Our Lord Jesus Christ) different from pagan sons of god's ie: Hercules son of god of zeus, Mithra born of a virgin women or rock ? Mithra was also a son of god.

How come Christianity is so closely related to some of the pagan worshiping methods of God ?, did the demons create this false application in influencing humans to create idols in the false form of a trinity god, sons of gods so they can distort the real TRUTH of God?. To Apply a false, confusing and misleading message to us human of who God really is ?.

They're nowhere near as similar (in fact only extremely superficially do they have any similarity at all) as you seem to believe. To take your two examples, Hercules is a demi-god (so half and half) born of Zeus having a physical relationship with his mother Alcmene. This is nothing like the Incarnation. Similarly, despite the claims to the contrary that are often heard Mithra wasn't born of a virgin, or even born at all really, but was pulled fully formed from a rock. And as for any alleged similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, even if they were to exist you couldn't argue that the pre-date Christianity. Almost everything we know about the Mithraic cult in the Empire is contemporary with the early Church (about 1st -4th century) and bears little resemblance to the pre-Christian Iranian belief in Mithra from which it supposedly derives.

There is none involved. He would have a better use of his time cleaning his apartment. In that there is no indication that he has used either reason or the process of thinking.......reasoning would not be applicable.

rea·son·ing (rz-nng)n.1. Use of reason, especially to form conclusions, inferences, or judgments.2. Evidence or arguments used in thinking or argumentation.

Been reading some of the replies, If Paganism stole from Judaism and Christianity, where did the idea of the Son of God come from What makes Christianity's Son of God (Our Lord Jesus Christ) different from pagan sons of god's ie: Hercules son of god of zeus, Mithra born of a virgin women or rock ? Mithra was also a son of god.

How come Christianity is so closely related to some of the pagan worshiping methods of God ?, did the demons create this false application in influencing humans to create idols in the false form of a trinity god, sons of gods so they can distort the real TRUTH of God?. To Apply a false, confusing and misleading message to us human of who God really is ?.

They're nowhere near as similar (in fact only extremely superficially do they have any similarity at all) as you seem to believe. To take your two examples, Hercules is a demi-god (so half and half) born of Zeus having a physical relationship with his mother Alcmene. This is nothing like the Incarnation. Similarly, despite the claims to the contrary that are often heard Mithra wasn't born of a virgin, or even born at all really, but was pulled fully formed from a rock. And as for any alleged similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, even if they were to exist you couldn't argue that the pre-date Christianity. Almost everything we know about the Mithraic cult in the Empire is contemporary with the early Church (about 1st -4th century) and bears little resemblance to the pre-Christian Iranian belief in Mithra from which it supposedly derives.

Did you even bother to read the page at that link before you posted it? The definition of 'Christ-like' appears to be so loose as to be meaningless, it doesn't even include Mithras, which is the figure we were disagreeing about, and it's hardly a scholarly reference. It's from someone who apparently saw an interesting documentary recently. Might I suggest you try again with some source more reputable and a great deal less superficial.

James

Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos

Or that Jesus is just the product of the finite mind as you said.. The human mind being limited and subscribing to certain archetypes.

For me, things are not either Jesus is who the EOC says it is or he didn`t exist at all.. The EO itself borrowed from the Oriental theology and still does at the limit of contradicting past ecumenical councils.. The eschatology with sin, salvation, heaven , hell , etc.. The Church itself as you might have realized does not focus that much on Christ and faith in Christ , but at itself as an entity, on saints, etc..

(a) I NEVER SAID CHRIST WAS A PRODUCT OF THE FINITE MIND, you did. Perhaps people's, yourself including, misconceptions, projections, and imaginations about Jesus Christ are finite and created, but not Jesus Christ Himself, and not the Gospel accounts of His Incarnation.(b) Again, you're reading to0 much Alexander Hislop

There is no historical Jesus for us to debate, He either exists as the Church teaches or He never existed at all, but to debate to the contrary is self-defeating and silly at best.

stay blessed,habte selassie

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

Or that Jesus is just the product of the finite mind as you said.. The human mind being limited and subscribing to certain archetypes.

For me, things are not either Jesus is who the EOC says it is or he didn`t exist at all.. The EO itself borrowed from the Oriental theology and still does at the limit of contradicting past ecumenical councils.. The eschatology with sin, salvation, heaven , hell , etc.. The Church itself as you might have realized does not focus that much on Christ and faith in Christ , but at itself as an entity, on saints, etc..

(a) I NEVER SAID CHRIST WAS A PRODUCT OF THE FINITE MIND, you did. Perhaps people's, yourself including, misconceptions, projections, and imaginations about Jesus Christ are finite and created, but not Jesus Christ Himself, and not the Gospel accounts of His Incarnation.

You indirectly and unwillingly did.You said that all the details of those gods,teachers,etc that appear also in Jesus were a product of the stereotypical mind. If they do than also the details of Jesus life that are exactly the same are also of the nature of the stereotypical mind.I think you also said that the human mind is finite and limit and it is due to this limitless that this stereotypes exist.. If so the nature of Jesus' similar details are also of this finite and limited mind.

Quote

(b) Again, you're reading to0 much Alexander Hislop

I haven`t read anything of Alexander Hislop.This is my own thinking.

Quote

There is no historical Jesus for us to debate, He either exists as the Church teaches or He never existed at all, but to debate to the contrary is self-defeating and silly at best.

stay blessed,habte selassie

No.Jesus either exists as the Bible teaches and portraits Him or He doesn`t exist at all.There is no solid proof of a connection between the changing "catholic" Church and the biblical characters.

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi